Members of LACRALO will be aware that I have been asked to look at the
election process to give my view as to whether this has been a fair
procedure. As the ICANN ombudsman it is part of my mandate to look at
matters of unfairness within the ICANN community, which therefore
includes an involvement where a process has taken place, and where I
receive a complaint of unfairness.
The process for nomination as the LACRALO representative for the
period 2015 â 2017 began with the 30 April announcement of the call
for nominations, and for statements by anyone nominated. The
nomination period lasted from 30 April to the 9th May, and during that
period Lance Hinds was nominated by Jose Francisco Arce. There were no
other nominations. The timetable would have included an election
period if there were other candidates, but as no other nominations
were received, an announcement was made that Lance Hinds was elected
by acclamation. However some members of LACRALO expressed concern that
because there was only one nominee, that previous precedent required
that there had to be a poll to certify that the majority of the ALS
supported the sole nomination.
On 20 July there was a scheduled LACRALO conference call, where it was
suggested that Lance Hinds was not eligible because it was alleged
that he had participation in businesses which created a conflict of
interest. Lance has asserted strongly that while he does own a small
software development company, and is the president of a local business
support organisation (a volunteer position) that he had no conflict.
He asserted neither of those interests had anything to do with ICANN
policy development. Normally this should be decided by the election
process rather than a poll subsequently held.
The next step was that the poll took place and staff announced the
results based on the process announced by Humberto and Alberto, which
were 21 against, 19 in favour and 3 abstentions. The abstentions were
not counted. Accordingly the LACRALO chair and secretary declared that
the results meant that there had to be a new election.
I have spoken to some, but unfortunately have not had time to talk to
all of the interested parties. I express regret that in a volunteer
organisation, there appeared to be attempts to silo categories of
persons eligible, when there are clearly only a limited number of
people with the enthusiasm and time, especially in smaller countries.
It has been said to me that particularly in the Caribbean, there are
only a small number of people who have the qualifications and ability
to serve, and that they will often wear several different hats. In my
view it would be a great pity to try to exclude enthusiastic
volunteers, but of course there is an election process to properly
canvass those issues.
In general, when there is an election process which has been
challenged, the fairest way to proceed is to rerun the process. There
is also an issue of perceived fairness. Even if the process was run
correctly, if there are strong views about the process, then an open
and transparent procedure calling a further election would answer any
issues of perceived unfairness, as the parties can then go into the
second process fully aware of the issues.
In this case I am conscious that there is criticism of the decision to
hold a poll, with a number considering that Lance Hinds should have
been selected by virtue of being the sole nominee, without the need
for a poll. Looking forward, it would be valuable to have a consensus
view on whether the rules should be amended to provide for this
specifically. But in a situation where there has been a vote against a
candidate, the fair process would be to rerun the election, and that
is my recommendation.
I am available to discuss this further if needed and invite anyone to
contact me, in confidence if necessary.
Chris LaHatte
Ombudsman
Blog https://omblog.icann.org/
Webpage http://www.icann.org/en/help/ombudsman
Confidentiality
All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as
confidential.
The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to
preserve the
privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the
complaint
being investigated by the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman shall only make
inquiries
about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity
of, a
complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint. The
Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if
staff
and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a
complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such
information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a
complaint
_______________________________________________
lac-discuss-en mailing list
lac-discuss-en@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en